Paul Prestopnik <pjp66259@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu> wrote:
> If CoV wants to piss people off, I guess that is one way to
> try and make them think
Well yes -- not so much "piss them off" perhaps, as make them aware that
other people have very different views -- on the TCS list right now they
are discussing a new slogan:
TAKING CHILDREN SERIOUSLY
The Right to Bite
It's designed, as it were, to make people realize this theory is very
different from other parenting theories -- almost their negation!
I think the CoV could benefit from the same sort of in-your-face stuff.
> People generally hold false beliefs
> because of a lack of information.
Exactly. And how do you intend to inform them without "pissing them off"
(my own experience tells me even the softest approach hurts them)
> I meant that we should not immediately attack new members of
> CoV. This is what pushed chardin away from this list.
Perhaps so -- she told me it was because she had become the "freak show": a
Christian amoungst atheists. I can't see how we can *honestly* avoid
giving Christians that feeling.
> I'm not saying I have an answer, but in my
> experience the only way I have EVER convinced
> someone to doubt their religious convictions was
> by asking them questions and letting them find the
> answers for themselves.
Now this is good advice -- we should be paying attention. What sorts of
questions? Anything specific you can recommend?
> I'm sure informal levels (groups) will develop within
> the CoV, as it grows, if we do not create formal ones.
> People who are interested in describing memetics according
> to mathematical equations will gather in one group, whereas
> those who are more interested in the social ramifications
> and creating change will gather in another.
Now this I can agree with -- but I don't think we should, say, construct
different mailing lists for the different groups. Those not interested in
memetic math can just ignore it, and ditto for the other "groups".
ERiC